Funnelling money back to the rich. Trump's policy.

[Jackson]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

If he bans Muslim immigration, secures the southern border, and creates jobs I don't care about the rich. I think others will forget about them too.

And what will banning Muslim immigration do? How many killings in the US have happened because of Muslims and how many because of non-Muslims?

And how many lives can we save by extreme vetting those from terrorist nations?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

n charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

You don'y know much about vouchers. Vouchers insure the poor have the choice of good schools, something the rich can pay for themselves. Vouchers even the playing field for parents who want better for their disadvantaged children.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

You don't even know what will be in the new Affordable Care Program. Trump hasn't even taken office yet, but we all know Obamacare has been an abject failure.
Four Years of Obamacare Failures Is Long Enough

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

How can a pick be someone without a background in finance???

Actually I know a lot about vouchers.

Vouchers don't ensure the poor have good schools. It's simply not the case.

Your logic is inherently flawed. Like the "everyone can make it in America", yes, everyone can make it, a lottery win can make you make it. However not everyone can make it together, only a few of them can make it, while the rest won't. There's only a small space for people to make it and a large space for people not to make it.

I've come across this argument many times. People act as if suddenly all schools will become good because suddenly they're being given vouchers. That if people can choose to go to another school with a voucher then they'll suddenly have better schools that if kids just have the choice to go to a school. Why does the voucher change anything?

In the UK parents have the choice of which school to send their kids. They don't have vouchers, but they have the SAME CHOICE that parents with vouchers have. The ONLY difference is that in the UK rich parents who send their kids to private schools don't get given money they don't need to make the choice to send them to expensive schools.

Vouchers have been in place nationwide in Chile. What's the result?

Rethinking Schools Online

"the experience internationally suggests that voucher plans promise a lot but may actually be worse for children from low-income families, for whom the gains are supposed to be the greatest."

"The Chilean plan began in 1980 under the Pinochet military government as part of an overall "de-governmentalization" free-market package."

"What were the results of this reform? The first was that even when parents' contributions are included, total spending on education fell quite sharply after increasing in the early 1980s when the central government was paying thousands of teachers severance pay as part of privatizing their contracts."

"The second result was that in Chile, as in Europe, those who took advantage of the subsidized private schools were predominantly middle- and higher-income families."

"Chile offers a voucher to all students. "Fees" often are charged at the private schools on top of the voucher, and private schools are allowed to screen students."

"By 1990, of families in the lower 40% of the income distribution, 72% attended municipal public schools."

"The third result was that the increase in pupil achievement predicted by voucher proponents appears to have never occurred. Scores in Spanish and mathematics from two nationally standardized cognitive achievement tests implemented in 1982 and 1988 for fourth graders registered a national decline of 14% and 6%, respectively."

So, the voucher scheme was a failure, except for the rich who got given money to go to school. The poor stayed in lower standard education for the most part because private schools STILL CHARGED money to exclude the poor, they still put in place screening, able to pick and choose whoever they liked and reject those who they didn't like. The poor lost out, standards DROPPED.

No, I don't know what will be in it exactly, but I can take a good guess. Besides, I'm talking about the guy who Trump wants in the post and what he has done.

Obamacare has been a failure? Well, I'd say the US health system is a failure. Too costly, not enough results for the people.

How can someone be picked without a background in finance? Well, what a great argument for always keeping things the same. However there are those who are pro-status quo and those who are against this. This guy seems to have gotten the job because he's friends with Trump, nothing more.

I'll tell you the brutal truth about vouchers that few want to acknowledge. It allows disadvantaged youth go to better schools without having the personal funds to go. However, the private schools don't have to keep them. If they fail, they go. If they cannot follow the rules of the school, they are out.

So, basically what happens is the students who cannot conform to the standards of the private schools, they have to return to the public schools. Teacher unions hate this because they do not have enough students to keep their school scores up. It works well for the disadvantaged students who can perform to their standards and codes, but not all students can conform to these standards.

So what is the ultimate answer? Vouchers, yes. But we need the best teachers in the public schools where teaching methods and the most talented teachers can reach the others as well. Pay those teachers who can perform in the public schools successfully significantly higher.

Does it?

You've just ignored everything I've shown you. IT DIDN'T WORK IN CHILE. It didn't increase results, it didn't make things better for most kids. It's not a good system.

It might allow a certain amount of change where poorer kids would go to a better school than they would otherwise go to, it might, but it doesn't change the fact that as a system it doesn't work.

Choice I think is a great thing in education. Don't get me wrong. I think that kids should have the choice of what public school they want to go to, and that if a school is failing then it can be seen by low numbers. But this DOESN'T require vouchers. It doesn't require rich kids being given money to go to a school they can already afford.

You say we need the best teachers in Public Schools. Sure. But then private schools will be charging voucher + extra money, so they'll be able to pay MORE for the best teachers. Vouchers don't change this.

If you want REAL CHANGE in education, you need to make sure REAL CHANGE happens and not funneling money out of the system into the pockets of the rich.

10% of kids are currently already in private school in the USA.

The Condition of Education - Participation in Education - Elementary/Secondary - Private School Enrollment - Indicator May (2016)

That's $5.4 million kids. To give each of these 5.4 million kids say $10,000 a year to continue to go to their private school you're going to be paying $54 billion a year to send kids to school they can alredy afford. Where is this $54 billion going to come from? It's going to come from the poorer students. It's not going to be made up with more taxes. It's going to be taken out of the system.

Now, you take the $70 billion the federal govt spends on education and give most of that away, then what?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

n charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

You don'y know much about vouchers. Vouchers insure the poor have the choice of good schools, something the rich can pay for themselves. Vouchers even the playing field for parents who want better for their disadvantaged children.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

You don't even know what will be in the new Affordable Care Program. Trump hasn't even taken office yet, but we all know Obamacare has been an abject failure.
Four Years of Obamacare Failures Is Long Enough

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

How can a pick be someone without a background in finance???

Actually I know a lot about vouchers.

Vouchers don't ensure the poor have good schools. It's simply not the case.

Your logic is inherently flawed. Like the "everyone can make it in America", yes, everyone can make it, a lottery win can make you make it. However not everyone can make it together, only a few of them can make it, while the rest won't. There's only a small space for people to make it and a large space for people not to make it.

I've come across this argument many times. People act as if suddenly all schools will become good because suddenly they're being given vouchers. That if people can choose to go to another school with a voucher then they'll suddenly have better schools that if kids just have the choice to go to a school. Why does the voucher change anything?

In the UK parents have the choice of which school to send their kids. They don't have vouchers, but they have the SAME CHOICE that parents with vouchers have. The ONLY difference is that in the UK rich parents who send their kids to private schools don't get given money they don't need to make the choice to send them to expensive schools.

Vouchers have been in place nationwide in Chile. What's the result?

Rethinking Schools Online

"the experience internationally suggests that voucher plans promise a lot but may actually be worse for children from low-income families, for whom the gains are supposed to be the greatest."

"The Chilean plan began in 1980 under the Pinochet military government as part of an overall "de-governmentalization" free-market package."

"What were the results of this reform? The first was that even when parents' contributions are included, total spending on education fell quite sharply after increasing in the early 1980s when the central government was paying thousands of teachers severance pay as part of privatizing their contracts."

"The second result was that in Chile, as in Europe, those who took advantage of the subsidized private schools were predominantly middle- and higher-income families."

"Chile offers a voucher to all students. "Fees" often are charged at the private schools on top of the voucher, and private schools are allowed to screen students."

"By 1990, of families in the lower 40% of the income distribution, 72% attended municipal public schools."

"The third result was that the increase in pupil achievement predicted by voucher proponents appears to have never occurred. Scores in Spanish and mathematics from two nationally standardized cognitive achievement tests implemented in 1982 and 1988 for fourth graders registered a national decline of 14% and 6%, respectively."

So, the voucher scheme was a failure, except for the rich who got given money to go to school. The poor stayed in lower standard education for the most part because private schools STILL CHARGED money to exclude the poor, they still put in place screening, able to pick and choose whoever they liked and reject those who they didn't like. The poor lost out, standards DROPPED.

No, I don't know what will be in it exactly, but I can take a good guess. Besides, I'm talking about the guy who Trump wants in the post and what he has done.

Obamacare has been a failure? Well, I'd say the US health system is a failure. Too costly, not enough results for the people.

How can someone be picked without a background in finance? Well, what a great argument for always keeping things the same. However there are those who are pro-status quo and those who are against this. This guy seems to have gotten the job because he's friends with Trump, nothing more.

Joe, the plumber didn't want the job of Treasury Secretary. Are you happy now?

No, I'm sure there's someone who could do the job much better.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

If he bans Muslim immigration, secures the southern border, and creates jobs I don't care about the rich. I think others will forget about them too.

And what will banning Muslim immigration do? How many killings in the US have happened because of Muslims and how many because of non-Muslims?

And how many lives can we save by extreme vetting those from terrorist nations?

I have no problem with vetting people from all countries, targeting Muslims is ridiculous.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

This is exactly what has happened under Obama so stop pretending like you care

I disagree. Obama wouldn't have been my choice to run the country, he's a politician through and through, however if it were a choice between him, Dubya or Trump, no contest really. Obama was actually interested in the people, the other two weren't.

Then, where was he when companies went to other countries. It just took Trump 4 days to keep Carrier. That was worth 1,000 jobs that were going to be lost. Tell me how he was interested in the blue collar workers!

It's called capitalism. The right love capitalism, oh, until capitalism bites them in the butt then they hate capitalism. Make up your mind. Are you pro-capitalism or anti-capitalism?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

If he bans Muslim immigration, secures the southern border, and creates jobs I don't care about the rich. I think others will forget about them too.

And what will banning Muslim immigration do? How many killings in the US have happened because of Muslims and how many because of non-Muslims?

And how many lives can we save by extreme vetting those from terrorist nations?

How many lives would have been saved? A few. But the right aren't interested in saving lives. When it comes to guns and seeing thousands of people die needlessly every year, when it comes to education and social policies that could save lives, the right couldn't give a fuck.

 

[Jackson]

You cannot compare Chile to the US. We (or I) don't know what the standards are for the vouchers and private schools catering to students below grade level performance. The vouchers should be limited to those families under a certain income.

Vouchers will work students who can handle the standards of a private school. As a teacher in the inner city, teachers would sometimes seek tuition scholarships to private schools for the most advanced students in their classrooms.

But we still have a crisis in the public schools. I personally feel that the public schools have so much superfluous non academic time spent on social engineering. We need to spend the day only on academics and forget the non educational nonsense going on.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

This is exactly what has happened under Obama so stop pretending like you care

I disagree. Obama wouldn't have been my choice to run the country, he's a politician through and through, however if it were a choice between him, Dubya or Trump, no contest really. Obama was actually interested in the people, the other two weren't.

Obama is an elitist snob who couldn't give a fuck about you

 

[Jackson]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

This is exactly what has happened under Obama so stop pretending like you care

I disagree. Obama wouldn't have been my choice to run the country, he's a politician through and through, however if it were a choice between him, Dubya or Trump, no contest really. Obama was actually interested in the people, the other two weren't.

Then, where was he when companies went to other countries. It just took Trump 4 days to keep Carrier. That was worth 1,000 jobs that were going to be lost. Tell me how he was interested in the blue collar workers!

It's called capitalism. The right love capitalism, oh, until capitalism bites them in the butt then they hate capitalism. Make up your mind. Are you pro-capitalism or anti-capitalism?

We are coming from different directions. I am pro

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

n charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

You don'y know much about vouchers. Vouchers insure the poor have the choice of good schools, something the rich can pay for themselves. Vouchers even the playing field for parents who want better for their disadvantaged children.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

You don't even know what will be in the new Affordable Care Program. Trump hasn't even taken office yet, but we all know Obamacare has been an abject failure.
Four Years of Obamacare Failures Is Long Enough

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

How can a pick be someone without a background in finance???

Actually I know a lot about vouchers.

Vouchers don't ensure the poor have good schools. It's simply not the case.

Your logic is inherently flawed. Like the "everyone can make it in America", yes, everyone can make it, a lottery win can make you make it. However not everyone can make it together, only a few of them can make it, while the rest won't. There's only a small space for people to make it and a large space for people not to make it.

I've come across this argument many times. People act as if suddenly all schools will become good because suddenly they're being given vouchers. That if people can choose to go to another school with a voucher then they'll suddenly have better schools that if kids just have the choice to go to a school. Why does the voucher change anything?

In the UK parents have the choice of which school to send their kids. They don't have vouchers, but they have the SAME CHOICE that parents with vouchers have. The ONLY difference is that in the UK rich parents who send their kids to private schools don't get given money they don't need to make the choice to send them to expensive schools.

Vouchers have been in place nationwide in Chile. What's the result?

Rethinking Schools Online

"the experience internationally suggests that voucher plans promise a lot but may actually be worse for children from low-income families, for whom the gains are supposed to be the greatest."

"The Chilean plan began in 1980 under the Pinochet military government as part of an overall "de-governmentalization" free-market package."

"What were the results of this reform? The first was that even when parents' contributions are included, total spending on education fell quite sharply after increasing in the early 1980s when the central government was paying thousands of teachers severance pay as part of privatizing their contracts."

"The second result was that in Chile, as in Europe, those who took advantage of the subsidized private schools were predominantly middle- and higher-income families."

"Chile offers a voucher to all students. "Fees" often are charged at the private schools on top of the voucher, and private schools are allowed to screen students."

"By 1990, of families in the lower 40% of the income distribution, 72% attended municipal public schools."

"The third result was that the increase in pupil achievement predicted by voucher proponents appears to have never occurred. Scores in Spanish and mathematics from two nationally standardized cognitive achievement tests implemented in 1982 and 1988 for fourth graders registered a national decline of 14% and 6%, respectively."

So, the voucher scheme was a failure, except for the rich who got given money to go to school. The poor stayed in lower standard education for the most part because private schools STILL CHARGED money to exclude the poor, they still put in place screening, able to pick and choose whoever they liked and reject those who they didn't like. The poor lost out, standards DROPPED.

No, I don't know what will be in it exactly, but I can take a good guess. Besides, I'm talking about the guy who Trump wants in the post and what he has done.

Obamacare has been a failure? Well, I'd say the US health system is a failure. Too costly, not enough results for the people.

How can someone be picked without a background in finance? Well, what a great argument for always keeping things the same. However there are those who are pro-status quo and those who are against this. This guy seems to have gotten the job because he's friends with Trump, nothing more.

Joe, the plumber didn't want the job of Treasury Secretary. Are you happy now?

No, I'm sure there's someone who could do the job much better.

Can you actually think that a person with the resume fit for the job would not do the job properly?

 

[frigidweirdo]

You cannot compare Chile to the US. We (or I) don't know what the standards are for the vouchers and private schools catering to students below grade level performance. The vouchers should be limited to those families under a certain income.

Vouchers will work students who can handle the standards of a private school. As a teacher in the inner city, teachers would sometimes seek tuition scholarships to private schools for the most advanced students in their classrooms.

But we still have a crisis in the public schools. I personally feel that the public schools have so much superfluous non academic time spent on social engineering. We need to spend the day only on academics and forget the non educational nonsense going on.

Yes I can compare Chile to the US thank you very much.

You say vouchers work. PROVE IT. Whenever vouchers have been used nationally it's been a failure.

This is my argument. You have an argument and you've backed it up with NOTHING.

Now you're saying vouchers should be limited to families under a certain income. That isn't going to happen. Why? Because the people who propose vouchers do so for one reason, and that reason is to funnel money to the rich.

Why have vouchers for poor students? Why not just allow them to choose any public school they like and IMPROVE THE STANDARD OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS?

You think public schools spend too much time on social engineering? I'd say they clearly don't spend enough time on this.

 

[Jackson]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

If he bans Muslim immigration, secures the southern border, and creates jobs I don't care about the rich. I think others will forget about them too.

And what will banning Muslim immigration do? How many killings in the US have happened because of Muslims and how many because of non-Muslims?

And how many lives can we save by extreme vetting those from terrorist nations?

How many lives would have been saved? A few. But the right aren't interested in saving lives. When it comes to guns and seeing thousands of people die needlessly every year, when it comes to education and social policies that could save lives, the right couldn't give a fuck.

Of course the right is interested in saving lives on it's citizens. And they have a right to take the jobs over illegals for a decent wage. Illegals are being paid at a lower rate for the same job that citizens once had. And I am interested in anti abortions. That would save many more lives especially in the minority population.

 

[Jackson]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

This is exactly what has happened under Obama so stop pretending like you care

I disagree. Obama wouldn't have been my choice to run the country, he's a politician through and through, however if it were a choice between him, Dubya or Trump, no contest really. Obama was actually interested in the people, the other two weren't.

Obama is an elitist snob who couldn't give a fuck about you

Obama is only interested in his legacy even when it works against the US citizens.

 

[Lastamender]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

If he bans Muslim immigration, secures the southern border, and creates jobs I don't care about the rich. I think others will forget about them too.

And what will banning Muslim immigration do? How many killings in the US have happened because of Muslims and how many because of non-Muslims?

And how many lives can we save by extreme vetting those from terrorist nations?

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

If he bans Muslim immigration, secures the southern border, and creates jobs I don't care about the rich. I think others will forget about them too.

And what will banning Muslim immigration do? How many killings in the US have happened because of Muslims and how many because of non-Muslims?

And how many lives can we save by extreme vetting those from terrorist nations?

How many lives could Muslims save if they reformed their religion and respected human rights. They are not our responsibility.

 

[Lastamender]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

If he bans Muslim immigration, secures the southern border, and creates jobs I don't care about the rich. I think others will forget about them too.

And what will banning Muslim immigration do? How many killings in the US have happened because of Muslims and how many because of non-Muslims?

And how many lives can we save by extreme vetting those from terrorist nations?

I have no problem with vetting people from all countries, targeting Muslims is ridiculous.

You are ridiculous. Their ideology/religion is intolerant and does not belong in any free country.

 

[Jackson]

You cannot compare Chile to the US. We (or I) don't know what the standards are for the vouchers and private schools catering to students below grade level performance. The vouchers should be limited to those families under a certain income.

Vouchers will work students who can handle the standards of a private school. As a teacher in the inner city, teachers would sometimes seek tuition scholarships to private schools for the most advanced students in their classrooms.

But we still have a crisis in the public schools. I personally feel that the public schools have so much superfluous non academic time spent on social engineering. We need to spend the day only on academics and forget the non educational nonsense going on.

Yes I can compare Chile to the US thank you very much.

You say vouchers work. PROVE IT. Whenever vouchers have been used nationally it's been a failure.

This is my argument. You have an argument and you've backed it up with NOTHING.

Now you're saying vouchers should be limited to families under a certain income. That isn't going to happen. Why? Because the people who propose vouchers do so for one reason, and that reason is to funnel money to the rich.

Why have vouchers for poor students? Why not just allow them to choose any public school they like and IMPROVE THE STANDARD OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS?

You think public schools spend too much time on social engineering? I'd say they clearly don't spend enough time on this.

We are both talking about improving the standards of the public schools, but with unions, it is hard. They protect the bad teachers and as the president of the Federation of Teachers once said, "I'll be interested in the students when they pay my salary."

 

[Lastamender]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

If he bans Muslim immigration, secures the southern border, and creates jobs I don't care about the rich. I think others will forget about them too.

And what will banning Muslim immigration do? How many killings in the US have happened because of Muslims and how many because of non-Muslims?

And how many lives can we save by extreme vetting those from terrorist nations?

How many lives would have been saved? A few. But the right aren't interested in saving lives. When it comes to guns and seeing thousands of people die needlessly every year, when it comes to education and social policies that could save lives, the right couldn't give a fuck.

And the Left does not give a fuck about the citizens of this country. We give the government its power not the other way around. And that power we give is to insure our safety and do things with our interests being foremost.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

This is exactly what has happened under Obama so stop pretending like you care

I disagree. Obama wouldn't have been my choice to run the country, he's a politician through and through, however if it were a choice between him, Dubya or Trump, no contest really. Obama was actually interested in the people, the other two weren't.

Obama is an elitist snob who couldn't give a fuck about you

Potentially. However he did more for the people than Bush did or Trump will do.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

This is exactly what has happened under Obama so stop pretending like you care

I disagree. Obama wouldn't have been my choice to run the country, he's a politician through and through, however if it were a choice between him, Dubya or Trump, no contest really. Obama was actually interested in the people, the other two weren't.

Then, where was he when companies went to other countries. It just took Trump 4 days to keep Carrier. That was worth 1,000 jobs that were going to be lost. Tell me how he was interested in the blue collar workers!

It's called capitalism. The right love capitalism, oh, until capitalism bites them in the butt then they hate capitalism. Make up your mind. Are you pro-capitalism or anti-capitalism?

We are coming from different directions. I am pro

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

n charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

You don'y know much about vouchers. Vouchers insure the poor have the choice of good schools, something the rich can pay for themselves. Vouchers even the playing field for parents who want better for their disadvantaged children.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

You don't even know what will be in the new Affordable Care Program. Trump hasn't even taken office yet, but we all know Obamacare has been an abject failure.
Four Years of Obamacare Failures Is Long Enough

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

How can a pick be someone without a background in finance???

Actually I know a lot about vouchers.

Vouchers don't ensure the poor have good schools. It's simply not the case.

Your logic is inherently flawed. Like the "everyone can make it in America", yes, everyone can make it, a lottery win can make you make it. However not everyone can make it together, only a few of them can make it, while the rest won't. There's only a small space for people to make it and a large space for people not to make it.

I've come across this argument many times. People act as if suddenly all schools will become good because suddenly they're being given vouchers. That if people can choose to go to another school with a voucher then they'll suddenly have better schools that if kids just have the choice to go to a school. Why does the voucher change anything?

In the UK parents have the choice of which school to send their kids. They don't have vouchers, but they have the SAME CHOICE that parents with vouchers have. The ONLY difference is that in the UK rich parents who send their kids to private schools don't get given money they don't need to make the choice to send them to expensive schools.

Vouchers have been in place nationwide in Chile. What's the result?

Rethinking Schools Online

"the experience internationally suggests that voucher plans promise a lot but may actually be worse for children from low-income families, for whom the gains are supposed to be the greatest."

"The Chilean plan began in 1980 under the Pinochet military government as part of an overall "de-governmentalization" free-market package."

"What were the results of this reform? The first was that even when parents' contributions are included, total spending on education fell quite sharply after increasing in the early 1980s when the central government was paying thousands of teachers severance pay as part of privatizing their contracts."

"The second result was that in Chile, as in Europe, those who took advantage of the subsidized private schools were predominantly middle- and higher-income families."

"Chile offers a voucher to all students. "Fees" often are charged at the private schools on top of the voucher, and private schools are allowed to screen students."

"By 1990, of families in the lower 40% of the income distribution, 72% attended municipal public schools."

"The third result was that the increase in pupil achievement predicted by voucher proponents appears to have never occurred. Scores in Spanish and mathematics from two nationally standardized cognitive achievement tests implemented in 1982 and 1988 for fourth graders registered a national decline of 14% and 6%, respectively."

So, the voucher scheme was a failure, except for the rich who got given money to go to school. The poor stayed in lower standard education for the most part because private schools STILL CHARGED money to exclude the poor, they still put in place screening, able to pick and choose whoever they liked and reject those who they didn't like. The poor lost out, standards DROPPED.

No, I don't know what will be in it exactly, but I can take a good guess. Besides, I'm talking about the guy who Trump wants in the post and what he has done.

Obamacare has been a failure? Well, I'd say the US health system is a failure. Too costly, not enough results for the people.

How can someone be picked without a background in finance? Well, what a great argument for always keeping things the same. However there are those who are pro-status quo and those who are against this. This guy seems to have gotten the job because he's friends with Trump, nothing more.

Joe, the plumber didn't want the job of Treasury Secretary. Are you happy now?

No, I'm sure there's someone who could do the job much better.

Can you actually think that a person with the resume fit for the job would not do the job properly?

A pro what?

Do I think he has a resume fit for the job? No.

 

[frigidweirdo]

You cannot compare Chile to the US. We (or I) don't know what the standards are for the vouchers and private schools catering to students below grade level performance. The vouchers should be limited to those families under a certain income.

Vouchers will work students who can handle the standards of a private school. As a teacher in the inner city, teachers would sometimes seek tuition scholarships to private schools for the most advanced students in their classrooms.

But we still have a crisis in the public schools. I personally feel that the public schools have so much superfluous non academic time spent on social engineering. We need to spend the day only on academics and forget the non educational nonsense going on.

Yes I can compare Chile to the US thank you very much.

You say vouchers work. PROVE IT. Whenever vouchers have been used nationally it's been a failure.

This is my argument. You have an argument and you've backed it up with NOTHING.

Now you're saying vouchers should be limited to families under a certain income. That isn't going to happen. Why? Because the people who propose vouchers do so for one reason, and that reason is to funnel money to the rich.

Why have vouchers for poor students? Why not just allow them to choose any public school they like and IMPROVE THE STANDARD OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS?

You think public schools spend too much time on social engineering? I'd say they clearly don't spend enough time on this.

We are both talking about improving the standards of the public schools, but with unions, it is hard. They protect the bad teachers and as the president of the Federation of Teachers once said, "I'll be interested in the students when they pay my salary."

Yes, it is hard to improve things with the unions. Vouchers doesn't necessarily change that. In Chile they got rid of unions, it was a dictatorship, and standards didn't improve.

The UK has education unions and the unions work to improve education.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Trump hasn't taken office yet, but already his picks are showing what his main policy is. To make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

In charge of education he wants DeVos who is a strong advocate for school vouchers. Vouchers are basically a ways of giving money to rich parents who can already send their kids to private school. So now they get money off their private school, and it won't do anything for most kids in the US.

Tom Price, who Trump will nominate to be in charge of Health, has sent through the last 3 Congresses a bill which would see people get reduced insurance bills, unless of course you have a problem in which case Price doesn't give a fuck about you and you'll have such a large insurance bill that you'll essentially die, unless of course you're rich.

Trump said he was having a revolution, that he was an outsider. So his pick for Treasury is a banker. The very people who caused all the problems that people could have supposed that a change, a revolution, would do away with. And he will essentially be carry out tax cuts for the wealthy.

For Attorney General there is Jeff Sessions. A guy who voted against a bill to prevent cruel, inhumane, or degrading punishment under the control of the US govt. He has a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Well we know Trump has no idea about Human Rights, so to pick someone who doesn't give a damn about them or the Constitution is telling.

Basically the rich will get richer, and the poor are stuffed. The President won't represent anyone who isn't in the top 10%.

If he bans Muslim immigration, secures the southern border, and creates jobs I don't care about the rich. I think others will forget about them too.

And what will banning Muslim immigration do? How many killings in the US have happened because of Muslims and how many because of non-Muslims?

And how many lives can we save by extreme vetting those from terrorist nations?

How many lives would have been saved? A few. But the right aren't interested in saving lives. When it comes to guns and seeing thousands of people die needlessly every year, when it comes to education and social policies that could save lives, the right couldn't give a fuck.

And the Left does not give a fuck about the citizens of this country. We give the government its power not the other way around. And that power we give is to insure our safety and do things with our interests being foremost.

Does the right? I mean, when you get into this partisan team game bullshit, it's all about winning and not about what's best.